Who doesn’t want more money in their pocket? After a brutal year that featured COVID lockdowns, small businesses and families trying to make ends meet could certainly use some.
At the end of June, the state legislature passed a $1.8 billion tax cut, the single largest tax cut in Arizona history. And Governor Ducey didn’t waste any time before signing the budget, which shouldn’t come as a big surprise. As Senator Mesnard explained while voting in favor of the budget:
At the end of the day, when this passes, every single taxpayer in Arizona will get a cut. Every single one.
It was certainly a day worth celebrating. But not everyone joined the party.
Apparently, Invest in Arizona, a political committee sponsored by Arizona Education Association and Stand for Children, isn’t happy with the idea of every Arizona taxpayer receiving a cut. In an effort to block the historic tax cuts, the group filed three referendums that include components from three bills passed this legislative session:
Over 50 property owners are seeking over $23 million in claims due to Flagstaff’s latest regulations on property rights. The Goldwater Institute is representing the property owners; the think tank noted in their announcement last month that “thousands more” could have viable claims against the city, too. Since then, Goldwater Institute Executive Vice President Christina Sandefur informed AZ Free News that more property owners have stepped forward to file a claim. Flagstaff has 90 days to respond to the pending claims.
Flagstaff passed an ordinance in March, the High Occupancy Housing Plan, that restricted residential and mixed-use property improvements. The city’s plan offered a wide scope of regulations, including a limit on the density and number of bedrooms and units in a property, as well as certain automobile and bicycle parking standards.
In a press release, the Goldwater Institute pointed out that state law – Prop 207, or the Private Property Rights Protection Act – requires Flagstaff to pay individuals whenever they take away their right to use their property. The institute argued further that the restrictions on renovations, improvements, or further property developments constituted a taking away of rights.
“Flagstaff’s ordinance is exactly the kind of government overreach that Arizona voters sought to guard against,” asserted the think tank. “That’s a costly burden on property owners, it’s unconstitutional, and it’s why the Goldwater Institute is seeking relief on their behalf under the Private Property Rights Protection Act.”
Under Prop 207, current recourse for Flagstaff property owners entails writing a letter to the city requesting payment for any property value diminishment the restriction caused, or for the city to waive certain restrictions entirely. Sandefur says that if proper recourse isn’t offered, they will take legal action.
“Under Proposition 207, the city has 90 days to decide whether to pay the property owners for taking their rights away, or whether to give them their rights back,” explained Sandefur. “We are hoping that the city does the right thing so that these claims don’t have to turn into litigation, which will be time-consuming and costly for the city.”
Flagstaff’s High Occupancy Housing Plan claimed that there would be no financial or policy impacts. The plan was considered an advancement to the city’s 2018 High Occupancy Housing Specific Plan (HOH Plan).
The Goldwater Institute clarifiedthat it hasn’t filed any lawsuits for these claims to date.
AZ Free News reached out to the city of Flagstaff for comment. They didn’t respond by press time.
A Maricopa County Superior Court judge did not rule on the Phoenix Union High School District’s (PXU) mask mandate during an emergency hearing Wednesday. The Kolodin Law Group filed on behalf of PXU biology teacher Douglas Hester on Monday, requesting an injunction against PXU’s mandate issued several days earlier.
PXU’s superintendent and governing board members were named as defendants in the lawsuit.
According to the new state law, no schools may require face coverings or the COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of in-person learning. The lawsuit pointed out that the law includes a retroactive clause for the mask and vaccine prohibition. Therefore, those parts of the law were expected to take effect on June 30.
Alexander Kolodin with Kolodin Law Group told AZ Free News that this lawsuit will determine whether government is bound to the law. He added that this case was an important determinant in restoring people’s faith in their governing system. According to Kolodin, Hester wasn’t the only teacher that voiced concern over the mask mandate.
“This lawsuit is simply about whether the government needs to follow the law or whether the government is above the law,” explained Kolodin. “The people’s duly elected representatives arrived at the idea that in the case of schools, the tradeoff between mandating masks and personal liberty was in favor of not mandating masks. That was the voice of the people.”
Kolodin credited State Representatives Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek) and Jacqueline Parker (R-Mesa) for their hand in the legislation prohibiting K-12 mask and vaccine mandates.
“Obviously the people of Arizona have been applying a lot of pressure to elected officials concerning these pandemic-mandated countermeasures,” said Kolodin. “[These] two state legislators worked with their constituents to get legislation passed to try to balance the interest of people and their liberty.”
Representative Paul Gosar, DDS (R-AZ-04) debuted a new series on Sunday to keep his constituents in the loop: “The Gosar Minute.” The series offers fast-hitting facts, commentary, and solutions for current issues, presented by Gosar’s staffers in the style of traditional broadcast journalism.
Gosar’s latest series may be difficult to find, however. AZ Free News discovered that Twitter has hidden the tag #GosarMinute under its “Sensitive Content” setting. Any users searching for #GosarMinute on Twitter with their search settings hiding sensitive content won’t be able to find those Gosar Minuteposts. However, users will be able to locate the Gosar Minute postings on Gosar’s congressional Twitter page.
Twitter says that “sensitive media” may fall into the following categories: graphic violence, adult content, violent sexual content, gratuitous gore, and hateful imagery.
The premiere episode featured Gosar’s intern, Faith Graham, discussing how Department of Justice (DOJ) Attorney General Merrick Garland refused to meet with Gosar and Representatives Louie Gohmert (R-TX-01), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA-14), and Matt Gaetz (R-FL-01) to discuss the mistreatment and physical abuse of those imprisoned for nonviolent offenses committed at the Capitol on January 6.
“Today I am launching ‘The Gosar Minute.’ My team will discuss current events in short one minute clips and my take or involvement in them,” wrote Gosar. “Today’s topic is my recent visit to the DOJ with @RepMTG@RepMattGaetz@replouiegohmert ENJOY!”
Today I am launching “The Gosar Minute.” My team will discuss current events in short one minute clips and my take or involvement in them. Today’s topic is my recent visit to the DOJ with @RepMTG@RepMattGaetz@replouiegohmert
Gosar’s affiliate, Beni Harmony, presented Wednesday’s Gosar Minute. The latest episode focused on President Joe Biden’s border crisis and Gosar’s proposed solution: a ten-year pause on all immigration at the southern border to stymie issues caused by the unchecked influx of illegal immigrants.
“#GosarMinute[:] We cannot have legal immigration when we are experiencing an invasion of rampant illegal immigration at our southern border. It’s a threat to our national security and economy. We must wrap our arms around this and press pause until we do. #10yearmoratorium[.]”
? #GosarMinute ? We cannot have legal immigration when we are experiencing an invasion of rampant illegal immigration at our southern border. It’s a threat to our national security and economy. We must wrap our arms around this and press pause until we do. #10yearmoratoriumpic.twitter.com/8hRMI3TTn7
On his personal account, Gosar retweeted the debut episode of Gosar Minute with a clarification: this series is part of what he calls the “Gosar News Network.”
“The Gosar News Network back at it dropping truth bombs like it’s my business,” wrote Gosar. “#GNN #GosarNewsNetwork #GosarMinute.”
While the public awaits the Arizona Senate’s report on how Maricopa County conducted the 2020 General Election, one senator is demanding Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich investigate the actions of the county’s board of supervisors in connection to the audit.
On Tuesday, Sen. Sonny Borelli (R-LD5) formally called on the attorney general to launch an investigation of the county board’s refusal to fully comply with Senate subpoenas issued in January and July as part of the audit. State law obligates Brnovich, also a Republican, to determine within 30 days whether the county has violated state statutes.
Should a violation of state law have occurred, Maricopa County could lose its portion of Arizona’s shared sales taxes. As of June 30, the county had benefited from shared sales taxes to the tune of $700 million, according to public records.
Borelli was not the only state lawmaker upset Tuesday by Maricopa County’s official attitude toward the Senate audit.
Rep. Jake Hoffman (R-LD12) accused the board of supervisors of engaging in “one of the most divisive and dangerous subversions of government” ever witnessed in Arizona.
“The Board’s blatant disregard for the Constitution and public mockery of the lawful oversight of elections by the Arizona legislature is not only disrespectful, it undermines the very fabric of our Republic,” Hoffman added. “Through its obstructionism, lack of transparency, and outright trampling of the Constitution, the Board of Supervisors has effectively spit in the face of every voter in Maricopa County and this state.”
Hoffman’s statement was in response to ongoing comments by Jack Sellers, the Republican chair of the county board, who has been openly critical of the Senate’s audit.
On Monday, Sellers chastised the Senate for hiring auditors with “no experience and little understanding” of how elections are run. He also characterized the audit as an “adventure in never-never land.”
“If you haven’t figured out that the election in Maricopa County was free, fair, and accurate yet, I’m not sure you ever will,” Sellers wrote. “There was no fraud, there wasn’t an injection of ballots from Asia nor was there a satellite that beamed votes into our election equipment.”
Sellers also called on elected officials “to tell the truth and stop encouraging conspiracies” and he challenged the Senate to be prepared to defend any accusations of misdeeds by the county.
“It’s time to move on,” Sellers wrote at the end of his letter.
Sellers’ tone and tenor is the norm for public comments issued by county officials about the audit, including a July 16 tweet by @MaricopaCounty which called the audit contractors “unqualified and untrained.” The tweet also repeated a common county mantra about the unreliability of any data put forth by Cyber Ninjas, the company Fann hired to conduct the Senate’s audit.
In other audit-related news, Judge Michael Kemp of the Maricopa County Superior Court issued an order Tuesday mandating Fann to comply with a request submitted in May for audit-related documents.
American Oversight sued Fann and the Senate after Fann and the Senate’s attorneys denied the non-profit advocacy group access to several audit-related documents via a public record request. The Senate turned over a number of documents, but several were denied on the basis that those documents were in the possession of Cyber Ninjas and its subcontractors, thus not qualifying as public records.
Kemp turned away Fann’s efforts last month to dismiss American Oversight’s lawsuit. Then on Tuesday, the judge ruled Arizona’s public records law requires the disclosure of the remaining documents.
According to Kemp’s ruling, Cyber Ninjas and its various subcontractor are private companies -not officers or public bodies- but are “clearly agents of the Senate Defendants.” Thus the Senate has a duty “to keep and maintain all records relating to this audit,” including all records of Cyber Ninjas and its subcontractor.
“Whether these public documents are in the actual physical control or possession of Senate Defendants is irrelevant to their duties and obligations,” under Arizona’s public records law, the judge ruled. Kemp added that claims that the senators have not seen the requested Cyber Ninjas documents does not carry water.
“Willful blindness does not relieve Senate Defendants from their duties and obligations” under the public records law, he ruled.
It is expected that the Senate will file with the Arizona Court of Appeals for review of Kemp’s ruling.
